Republic of Moldova
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA LOCAL ELECTIONS 14 and 28 June 2015 OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report Warsaw 20 August 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. 1 II. INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................... 3 III. BACKGROUND AND POLITICAL CONTEXT ......................................................................... 3 IV. ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................ 4 V. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION ................................................................................................. 6 VI. VOTER REGISTRATION ............................................................................................................. 7 VII. CANDIDATE REGISTRATION ................................................................................................... 9 VIII. ELECTION CAMPAIGN ............................................................................................................. 11 IX. CAMPAIGN FINANCE ................................................................................................................ 12 X. MEDIA ............................................................................................................................................ 15 A. MEDIA ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................................................... 15 B. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................................ 15 C. MEDIA MONITORING FINDINGS ....................................................................................................... 17 XI. CITIZEN AND INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS ................................................................... 18 XII. COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS .................................................................................................. 19 XIII. ELECTION DAY ........................................................................................................................... 20 A. FIRST ROUND VOTING ...................................................................................................................... 20 B. SECOND ROUND VOTING ................................................................................................................. 21 XIV. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 22 A. PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 22 B. OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................ 22 ANNEX I: FINAL RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 25 ANNEX II: LIST OF OBSERVERS IN THE INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION .............................................................................................................................. 27 ABOUT THE OSCE/ODIHR .................................................................................................................. 29 REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA LOCAL ELECTIONS 14 and 28 June 2015 OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following an invitation from the authorities of the Republic of Moldova, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) established a Limited Election Observation Mission (LEOM) to observe the June 2015 local elections. The OSCE/ODIHR LEOM assessed compliance of the electoral process with OSCE commitments and other international obligations and standards for democratic elections, as well as national legislation. For election observation on 14 June, the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM joined efforts with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Council of Europe. The OSCE/ODIHR LEOM remained in the country to observe second round contests on 28 June. The 2015 local elections were efficiently administered and offered the electorate a diverse choice. However, confidence in the process decreased following cases of abuse of temporary voter registration provisions during the first round. The elections were held in a context of political turmoil due to a sizeable financial scandal and the prime minister’s resignation two days before the first round. The campaign environment was strongly impacted by the division of political forces and society over the country’s future orientation. The campaign was lively and generally free, although reflected through politically influenced media, which informed the public on the campaign, but generally did not provide balanced coverage. Fundamental freedoms were respected, yet a few violent incidents occurred. The legal framework generally provides an adequate basis for conducting democratic elections. The Election Code was amended in April 2015, after the elections were called, mainly related to the campaign and campaign finance. While many amendments address previous OSCE/ODIHR and Council of Europe recommendations, introducing changes so close to the elections led to some confusion and runs contrary to international good practice. Despite a number of improvements, some shortcomings remain outstanding, such as prohibiting the use of state and foreign symbols and images and involving foreign citizens in campaigning, which is a disproportionate restriction challenging freedom of expression. A number of ambiguities and contradictions between the Election Code and other laws have not been addressed. An unclear legal framework for first round recounts and run-offs impacted campaign activities and preparations for the second round. The Central Election Commission (CEC) administered the elections in a professional manner overall, generally respected deadlines and enjoyed the trust of most stakeholders; but confidence in some lower level commissions decreased following their performance during the first round, including on the handling of complaints. The CEC did not clarify gaps in the Election Code related to the second round. After the first round, several complaints were filed alleging registration of temporary residents close to the elections and of numerous voters at the same address. As a result, public trust in the integrity of voter lists was negatively affected. Limited efforts were made to encourage and promote opportunities for women`s participation. Women candidates received marginal news coverage and few were featured in campaign activities. Only one of nine CEC members is a woman, and women represented some 52 per cent of Level 2 1 The English version of this report is the only official document. Unofficial translations are available in Romanian and Russian. Republic of Moldova Page: 2 Local Elections, 14 and 28 June 2015 OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report District Electoral Councils (DECs); some 74 per cent of Level 1 DECs and some 82 percent of Precinct Electoral Bureaus. The CEC managed certain aspects of the process with its State Automated Information System “Elections” (SAISE), which it reviewed for malfunctions during the 2014 parliamentary elections. Polling staff used it to verify voters and transmit counting results directly to the CEC. The SAISE performed well, with minor Internet connectivity issues during voting. The centralized electronic voter registry was used for the first time in local elections. The responsibilities of various public authorities for data accuracy remained partially undefined, which led to a lack of accountability from these institutions. For the second round, the CEC used voter lists from the first round to prevent possible artificial voter migration. Five days prior to the second round, it clarified certain voter eligibility procedures, which led to varied practices employed by polling staff. Registered parties and blocs could start campaigning after registration by the respective election administration body. In an overall inclusive process, 4,421 mayoral candidates (22 per cent women) and 63,549 candidates for local councils (35 per cent women) were registered. A few instances of different implementation of the same legal provisions on candidates raised concerns regarding the selective application of the law. Contestants campaigned in both the state and Russian languages. In April 2015, legal amendments were approved aiming to enhance campaign finance provisions. However, the regulatory system and its implementation were insufficient to ensure transparency, integrity and accountability of campaign finances, and did not enjoy public confidence. The CEC, tasked with campaign finance oversight, lacked sufficient resources to efficiently monitor compliance. Nevertheless, the CEC published financial reports on its website in a timely manner and warned contestants for delayed reporting. While media freedom is safeguarded, the high concentration of media ownership endangers media pluralism. The media monitored by the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM offered wide coverage of the election campaign in a variety of formats and informed on the political alternatives, but showed biased coverage, thus failing to comply with the legal requirement of impartiality. Local broadcasters generally